M/S Anjaneya Steel And Anr vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Held
The Court held that the respondent authorities were obligated to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated July 15, 2022. The disposal must be in accordance with the law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, and must take into consideration the judgment relied upon by the petitioner, Kinaram Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal. The Court directed the authorities to dispose of the representation within three weeks from the date of communication of the order. Before passing a final order, the petitioner or their authorized representative must be given an opportunity of hearing. The Court also expected that no coercive action would be taken against the petitioner until the representation is disposed of. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Anjaneya Steel & Anr., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Calcutta. The petitioner had made a representation on July 15, 2022, to the respondent authorities concerning a grievance. The petitioner alleged that the respondents had not disposed of this representation. The petitioner relied on a previous decision of the Court in Kinaram Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal. The respondent CGST authority requested some time to dispose of the representation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondent authorities are obligated to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated July 15, 2022, in accordance with law and by passing a reasoned and speaking order? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the respondent authorities were sitting on their representation and had failed to dispose of it, necessitating judicial intervention. They relied on the High Court's decision in Kinaram Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal (2022 (65) GSTL 163 (Cal.)) to support their claim for timely redressal. Respondent's Contention: The learned advocate representing the respondent CGST authority submitted that a little time might be granted to dispose of the said representation, implying an acknowledgment of the need for disposal but seeking an extension.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022. p.b. Sl. No.
W.P.A. 20867 of 2022 M/s. Anjaneya Steel & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. Mr. N. K. Chowdhury, Mr. Nilotpal Chowdhury, Mr. Prabir Bera. ……..for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Thakur. ………for the respondent no.
Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Ms. Manasi Mukherjee. ………..for the respondent nos.1 to 3. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. It appears from Annexure P-4 at page 109 of the wit granted to dispose of the said representation, th
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.